By MARTY LEVINE

 

The Senate Educational Policies Committee heard from Pitt administrators about the impact of two new developments on Oct. 9 – the federal rule holding international students (including doctoral candidates) to a four-year visa limit, and the pilot program for different software behind the OMETS (student course evaluations from the Office of Measurement and Evaluation of Teaching).

 

Vice Provost of Graduate Studies Amanda Godley suggested the new visa limit may face legal challenges – but perhaps is still worth all universities discussing. 

 

Pitt has a working group looking at what PhD programs can or should do if the rule takes force, Godley noted. In some laboratory-based programs, she said, students could not complete a dissertation from overseas, for practical reasons, while in other programs remote completion might be possible. She did not see any overall decision applying to every instance.

 

“It was a major topic of conversation” at the Association of American Universities meeting she had attended the previous week, Godley reported. Certainly universities would need to know whether the new rules would govern before accepting their next batch of international PhD students.

 

History faculty John Stoner, former committee chair and now one of the committee’s senate liaisons, noted that, in the past, eight years was the average PhD length, from first class to finish. “Is there some academic, intellectual argument for this?” he asked of the four-year limit.

 

“A lot of professional organizations are having this discussion,” Godley answered. “There's a diversity of opinion in every field about how much time is needed for a rigorous PhD.” It should also be noted, she said, that “more than 50 percent of our graduate students don't pursue careers in the academic field. We need researchers in every [field], not just higher ed. What does that mean in what PhDs should look at? This is a conversation that is probably long overdue.”

 

She anticipates more such rule changes rather than legislative changes concerning this issue. Rule changes are “subject to lawsuits if they do not follow the original intentions” of existing federal programs or fund allocations, she added, and this is the very basis upon which AAU is already suing the federal government over other issues.

 

“How easy would it be to extend the date” of a four-year Phd if the rule applies? “No one knows,” Godley answered. “It hasn't been a rule before.” A state-level court has thus far stayed this federal change. 

 

Vice Provost of Undergraduate Studies Adam Lee, in his report to the committee, said that, following a pilot test of new software from Class Ranked running the OMETS, the University has decided to stick with its long-time OMETS software, Blue, from Explorance. 

 

During the pilot, “feedback ... indicated that the other platform was a better fit moving forward,” he said.

 

Lisa Votodian, survey assessment manager in the University Center for Teaching and Learning, said that faculty participating in the pilot test did not find it as easy to add questions to the OMET under Class Ranked, for instance. Neither Lee nor Votodian offered more details, with the latter adding that the decision was based on “a more holistic assessment” than any individual problems observed.

 

“The midterm surveys are still going to work with Class Ranked,” she said, but the OMETs will be changed back to Blue by the end of the semester.

 

“Only 10 percent participated in the pilot,” Lee added. “If you weren't part of the pilot, hopefully will not notice a change.”